This entry was posted on Thursday, January 17th, 2013 at 8:00 am and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
How can a German court fine a British citizen for remarks made on Swedish TV? Alas granny doesn’t expand
Holocaust denial is up there with the faked moon landings, the US Government bringing down the twin towers and the latest nuttiness that the US Government faked Sandy Hook
Would you feel the same way if it were illegal to, say, question the citizenship of the President of the US? Or to challenge the spiritual beliefs of maori? Or to question the “global consensus” of CAGW? The problem with defining “allowable” versus “non allowable” speech is just that.
I’m totally up for people having responisbility for what they do with their freedom, including being treated with contempt and derision by the rest of us, but treating them as criminals?
Pete George: Thanks for your reply at 7:27pm yesterday to my earlier question. You’re clearly in favour of disposing of TVNZ.
Your suggestion about retaining an element of public broadcasting makes reasonable sense to me (i.e. NZ on Air funding of public-interest programmes “broadcast” through mixed media, not just traditional TV or radio). However, I would suggest three qualifications:
a) tight legislative definition of “public-interest programmes”;
b) very limited and clearly-defined annual budget allocation; and
c) sunset clause in the empowering legislation (10-12 years?) to facilitate a positive legislative extension or automatic termination at that time.
Re my second qualification, I have in mind a funding formula such as “0.25% of total Government expenditure”. (However that kind of approach could be insulated against political manipulation. )
Holocaust denial is up there with the faked moon landings, the US Government bringing down the twin towers and the latest nuttiness that the US Government faked Sandy Hook
Except you don’t go to jail or get fined for questioning the official account of those things. Nor do you go to jail, or get fined, for questioning the official account of all those killed, since the war, under socialist regimes. The Holocaust was terrible, but is not even close to being as bad as what happened in Mao’s China, for example. Stalin killed more people in the Ukraine, in one year, than the entire Holocausts even most inflated figures. Some estimates of Mao’s death toll exceed the TOTAL death toll of the war on ALL sides combined.
So why is it (only) against the law to question the official account of the Holocaust, inflicted on Jews, by the Socialist workers party of Germany?
By the way… most of the people who died in the war, were christians, not Jews.
@Andrei
It’s a criminal offence in Germany to deny the holocaust. This man broke the law.
Maybe there should be a campaign to change the law but that’s not what is being said here.
@ Lance, of course not, that’s part of what I mean by taking responsibility for your use of free speech. Criminalising it isnt the answer (libel is a civil matter, perjury isn’t about free speech).
So Tinman
Randomly abusing people, racist taunts, accusations of criminal activity are all O.K.?
That would be free speech wouldn’t it?
1. Yes they are ok.
2. Yes it is free speech.
I am interested who you think should decide what can be said and what can not be said Lance ? Would you be ok with, for example, a ultra right wing government deciding what we can say ?
You assume that our left wing regime will decide and that they will retain power, but that could change, as it is in parts of Europe. You are inviting trouble by opposing free speech. Careful what you ask for.
Lance (1) According to the story he didn’t say it in Germany
(2) as was said above why is Holocaust denial a crime? Why don’t we just treat nuts as um er well nuts
@ Kea – because that is German law, they have a unique perspective and no doubt the law was bought in when they were still feeling guilty about everything. It’s also (mostly) against the law to display swastikas and other nazi paraphenalia in Germany for the same reason. I agree with Lance on that point but it is up to the Germans to change their own laws not us, we can simply point and laugh.
@Andrei
I imagine it’s an EU thing, unified legal systems or something like that.
Nope. It’s pure German law.
The argumentation is something along the lines that Richard Williamson knew and purposefully allowed his comments to spread to Germany and therefore is subject to the German laws.
Agree that it’s a silly law, born out of the German history, but it is obsolete in modern Germany now.
Whale has been exercising his free speech but it’s not a good look when he uses his powerful pulpit to randomly abuse. He accuses Labourites of being nasty and Greens of being hypocritical but he’s being both in his latest attempt at ginger bashing. I call boomerang on his claim of beserk.
There is a kind of flip side to this too – which is state sponsored propaganda of particular viewpoints, and not just form totalitarian states. Visit the Japanese war museum in Tokyo and you will be left with the strong impression that peaceful Japan was forced into fighting a series of defensive wars to protect itself from foreign agressors while falling over itself to protect civilians from harm. There was no rape of Nanking, just Japanese casualties protecting civilians from terrorists. It’s quite extraordinary.
My problem with the whole “public-interest” issue is the definition, thereof.
Given the political leanings (decidedly left wing with only a rare centrist) of the producers (the folk who determine the subject matter, and thrust of any programme) I would just as soon do without any form of “public broadcasting”. It is a throwback to the days when possession of a radio was a licenced privilege, and gave rise to the Beeb and NZBS. My UK friends are forever grumbling over their Beeb fee, but they never vote with civil disobedience…..
Incidentally, PBS in the US appears to be decided wobbly due to cuts in corporate sponsorship and likely federal and state grant cuts. Their audience is only a fraction of Fox (which beats all other networks), for example.
@Andrei
It’s a criminal offence in Germany to deny the holocaust. This man broke the law.
Maybe there should be a campaign to change the law but that’s not what is being said here.
However there is a huge amount of flexibility to decide whether to prosecute or not. In this case it was rather absurd to prosecute.
The absurdity is that such a move gives the man and his views a much larger platform and publicity than he would have otherwise had.
KiwiGreg – ” I agree with Lance on that point but it is up to the Germans to change their own laws not us, we can simply point and laugh”
I am pointing and laughing. However, Lance seems to think freedom of speech needs to be restricted to “approved” things that he agrees with. And that I do not agree with.
Wow, I think society sets the standards, you think there should be no standards.
Lance, I am happy for “society” to set the standards, but not central government. Under no circumstances is it ok for people to punished by the state for speaking their minds, regardless of how twisted those minds may be.
What you are really demanding is that YOUR way of thinking is enforced by the state.
How about a “law” making it an offence to say there was a holocaust ? Are you ok with that, and if not, why ? There are people who would actually support that. What happens if they get into power, once we have previously established that free speech can be a criminal offence ?
Lance, So you are now advocating violent assault against those you don’t agree with ?
Never takes long for you lefties to show your true colours. So far you have demanded the state imprison and fine people who say things YOU don’t like. Now we have you supporting casual violence and beatings to prevent freedom of speech.
As a liberal I struggle with the mentality of people like you. Why not let people decide for themselves what to take notice of ?
Lance, if society really set the standard, then how could that safeguard be removed ? If society feels that way, then why do you advocate the state making laws about it ?
German “society” DID NOT demand people who question the holocaust be thrown in jail. That was the state. German people did not demand Jews be killed, that was the state. Every large scale human rights abuse has been done by the state. Do not look to them for your morals, get your own moral compass in order.
Lance, I see the humour in that clip, I was making a point.
However having the state restrict freedom of speech, in anyway at all, is far from funny. You must have a dismal view of your fellow man, to think we all need politicians to provide us with morals.
Don’t be such a delicate petal Pete George. A bit of rough and tumble is good for the soul – we don’t all want to sit around drinking tea with cucumber sandwhiches discussing the issues in earnest fashion the way you do.
Lance, thanks for the “offensive language” (again) I suggest a beating and imprisonment to enforce “societies” standards. See, you convinced me. Well done !
“The young are coming and with them comes great change.”
Really? The young have always been coming as it’s kind of hard to skip that part of growing up and there are actually proportionally a lot less young then in previous generations.
Lance, I think I did answer all the points raised. However you have not really addressed mine.
Do you often write to your MP for guidance on issues such as; morality, child rearing, how much you should drink ?
It may surprise you to learn that many of us do not look to politicians for moral guidance or instruction on how to manage our lives or treat others decently. I think that is the difference between us. I do not need the threat of being punished by the state to force me to treat others properly. I assume that most others are the same, even though I have far more exposure to those who do not share those values, than most people.
I think what you are ignoring is that any restriction of speech should only be on the basis of identifiable harm to another individual. Abusing people in public, harassment, defamation, underage pornography, inciting a crowd to riot/harm another person… all these things while a form of “speech” harm other people directly and are justified limitations.
However, the mere having an opinion which is disagreeable (i.e. holocaust denial) is not harmful and one cannot reasonably use the notion that such speech might (in some indirect and unquantifiable way) encourage people towards harmful political ends because by that standard no speech is free. So the fact you support this law does indicate that you are not a supporter of free expression in my view.
Azeraph raises an interesting point. Is the obsession with political pigeonholing more prevalent with older people or do young people try to do it as much?
Without realizing it the last century killed the moral compass system of nations, the Church system. So, what is there now? What is there to replace it? Neo-Atheist 2.0? philosophy??
Statistically speaking crime is dropping planetwide or is it? or is it the shock of how fast the news of it reaches us in this era of today?
There’s a Q here that i haven’t seen ever addressed anywhere but even i’m finding it hard to grasp it as it feels it’s on the tip of my tongue.
Pete George
Whale and his dislike of redheads is a reflection of his bulling nature and his mental issues around being a fat bastard
We can not change our genetic hair color his persecution of gingers is wank. We can stop being fatty pigs. I am sure he would not respond well to constant posts pointing this out.
I hate it when difference in hair color gives someone motivation to be a c*nt . You are stepping past joking and actively persecuting those that have no chance to conforming to your idea of norm.
dime take note I am not being disrespectful to the over built just to whales attitude.
Ps Whales post on subsidized insurance cracks me up. does he realize that the insurance costs are high and rising due to AGW As reinforced by this year being second most costly for natural disasters in the USA.?
Azeraph, our morality may be partly informed by religious belief, however much of it is in spite of what is written in the bible. We do not kill people for working on a Sunday, or require rape victims to marry their attackers. It is not fashionable to stone non-virgin brides to death on their fathers door step.
Everybody one way or another is a minority Pete George because we are unique.
It is only moronic lefties who put people into boxes to create so called “victim groups” so they can “bully” people into complying with whatever nutty scheme they have in mind or transfer wealth or bestow some sort favour upon someone who would not otherwise merit it.
The world is a tough place, I leaned this as a child, we have to cope with it. People make fun of your hair, your cloths, your accent, your origin and ethnicity. ususaly this is good natured and if they go too far a good bop on the nose is a good signal to them that they have
Whaleoil has called me a c***t more than once Pete George and I don’t go boo hoo hooing to nanny about it.
@Andrei
It’s a criminal offence in Germany to deny the holocaust. This man broke the law.
Maybe there should be a campaign to change the law but that’s not what is being said here.
I will never understand people whose justification for something is “it’s the law”. I think laws require moral justification and if one is unable to justify it then it is logical to oppose the law and to criticize anyone punished under such a law. People whose argument devolves to “it’s the law” either have no argument, or are statists keen to submit to authority merely because they are an authority.
Exactly Kea, when was the last time you knew anyone who was personally? or in the news? I’m not trying to convert you or anyone but the older gens have this fixation.
@Weihana
You have come the closest to what I am saying.
First paragraph, agree totally
I am not, nor ever did promote that holocaust denial should be made illegal in this country, or other such nutter views.
All I said was I had no sympathy for the offender. I personally find those views offensive. I assume I am allowed have those views?
Somehow this got twisted by the logically challenged into me advocating draconian state control, any attempts at explanation then was twisted further.
I think you will find Germany had major problems with the attempted resurrection of the Nazi party post WW2 and holocaust denial was a vehicle to further vilify a racial minority, elements of German society really wanting the ugly truth to go away. This had potential for harm and why it was a law it that country. One might say a unique case.
As I further said maybe it is time for Germany to move on.
Morality (from the Latin moralitas “manner, character, proper behavior”) is the differentiation of intentions, decisions, and actions between those that are “good” (or right) and those that are “bad” (or wrong). The philosophy of morality is ethics. A moral code is a system of morality (according to a particular philosophy, religion, culture, etc.) and a moral is any one practice or teaching within a moral code. Morality may also be specifically synonymous with “goodness” or “rightness.” Immorality is the active opposition to morality (i.e. opposition to that which is good or right), while amorality is variously defined as an unawareness of, indifference toward, or disbelief in any set of moral standards or principles
No mention of the church in that definition maybe the church has no prior clam to being the holder of morality
Distilled ethics is
do to others as they do to you /do to others as you would have them do to you.
Christianity has a long and comprehensive history of ignoring this. Shall we stop Catholics from marring. Or enforce what they can do with there bodies Make them take birth control Or even persecute them as they have done to other sects for eons.
In the written history of man which is what? 6ooo years where do we see a state that doesn’t have a separate system that takes on the role of a moral compass for the group/s of that state?
In today’s era which may seem similar to last centuries system we have something that has never been seen before.
Now Andrei is degenerating this into war crimes justification….. Fuck
No I’m not, I am just pointing out that not all laws made by man are morally good.
And there may be compelling reasons for disobeying the laws of the land at times.
Thus in Nazi occupied Europe it was a crime punishable by death to harbour Jews, THE LAW, and some of those who broke the law paid for it with their lives.
My guess is that most people who read this thread think those who broke that particular law behaved in a manner most exemplary
Andrei, not sure what you’re on about, Whale didn’t call me anything and I didn’t boo hoo to anyone.
It is only moronic lefties who put people into boxes to create so called “victim groups” so they can “bully” people into complying with whatever nutty scheme they have in mind or transfer wealth or bestow some sort favour upon someone who would not otherwise merit it.
It’s not people with ginger hair (or many other miniroties) who put themselves in boxes, it’s the bullies and the encouragers of bullies that do that.
People make fun of your hair, your cloths, your accent, your origin and ethnicity. ususaly this is good natured and if they go too far a good bop on the nose is a good signal to them that they have
Those doing the bullying claim they are good natured and funny, but those on the receiving end often don’t see it that way.
So you propose violence as a way of resolving problems? Isn’t violence an insidious part of an immoral society?
“dime take note I am not being disrespectful to the over built just to whales attitude.” lmao what the fuck?
how did i come into this?
it does make me laugh that whale is constantly bagging fatties. the dude rolls with multiple chins.
for what its worth i started reading whale for a while. the negativity got to me. reading whale is like watching sean hannity. they are always right. you cant disagree with them. always trashy name calling etc.
Dime prefers a classy DPF style blogger. Sure, some of us dirtbags lower the tone in the comments section but DPF is above all the shitty name calling etc
Mr Dime it was a way to point out that I dont dislike fat bastards just those that are so and persecute others.
You bite so it was properly a justified arse cover.
You commitment to building a impressive body still going strong dime?
Have not seen a resent up date on you outcomes
your posts inspired many to consider their own fitness and commitment to doing something about it.
Diet is pretty dam clean. Easy in summer. lots of protein and salads. just got back into juicing over the last week too. vege juice etc
The plan is too build a gym in my garage. Probably early April. Squat rack, bench, punching bag. I think i can do it for a couple of grand. no1 fitness seems to have some good stuff. benches that will hold 400kg etc
Plates are expensive. 20kg plate is about 70 bucks. i need 200kg arghhh
oh yeah, im doing more cardio. im dating this sweet little 23 year old who wants to enter me into round the bays etc cause shes doing it haha managed to avoid all offers so far but i suspect i wont be able to hold out for long dime wasnt born to run long distances. im a fast twitch muscle guy.. not the weak, slow twitch type
The holocaust denial laws made sense in Europe for a limited period of time after the war just like the occupation of Germany made sense for a time. I would say that time period was about 20 years but those sorts of restrictions are no longer is appropriate in a modern democracy.
It just gives radical Islamists ammo to argue in favour of blasphemy laws by saying ‘but free speech is not absolute’.
All I said was I had no sympathy for the offender. I personally find those views offensive. I assume I am allowed have those views?
Sure. It doesn’t exactly bring a tear to my eye either. Though I do find it objectionable that he is punished.
I think you will find Germany had major problems with the attempted resurrection of the Nazi party post WW2 and holocaust denial was a vehicle to further vilify a racial minority, elements of German society really wanting the ugly truth to go away. This had potential for harm and why it was a law it that country. One might say a unique case.
I tend to agree. While not supporting the law per se, I think I can acknowledge that WW2 was such an extreme case that such a law is understandable even if objectionable on principle. However, I certainly feel it has no justification 60-70 years later and aside from being objectionable on principle, it also creates martyrs out of idiots who believe such crap.
Lance (1,633) Says:
January 17th, 2013 at 10:13 am
@Weihana
Your comment at 10:01am made a statement that I had no logic behind my statement other than “it was the law”
This is a big assumption, and incorrect.
Fair enough, the plot of this discussion was a little hard to follow and if I’ve misrepresented your position I apologize. To be honest I just wanted to make the point that I’m not a fan of people saying “it’s the law” as a rebuttal when the discussion really centers around whether the law is justifiable.
The kerfuffle over BMI cracks up Griff he has always exceeded the range for weight height even thought he is a skinny bastard.
cadio is good no sense on packing extra muscle if you cant move it around for long.
fitness gear is cheap secondhand many splash out on fancy equipment then lose interest
ive always found that exercise based around moving your own body mass is cheap effective and can be done anywhere/time.
still I am to lazy now
Once it was two 5km bike sprints daily weights every second day and swimming in the weekend.
Now its just work lugging building supplies and mulch that keeps my hart going.
landscaping lugging shit from one place to another.
still the only smoker in the family and my fitness blows the rest away.
Thank you, your last reply was a breath of fresh air
Agreed the discussion got way out of hand, deliberately or otherwise.
I was frustrated at being misrepresented so was being blunt. The “it’s the law” line was a particular button for me as I don’t like that justification myself. It appears 2 issues became 1 and the rest was downhill.
1. I don’t like the guys views
2. He stirred the hornets nest and got stung. The right or wrong of the law was worth discussing especially as it was created as a special case but now time has elapsed.
The Australian newspaper reported on Tuesday that “…the latest science on sea levels found no link to global warming or the increased rate of glacier melting”.
This has aparently been corrected:
@sarahclarkeabc
the Australian has done correction to Monday front page story and says #climate change IS linked to sea level rise after misquoting IPCC
And in a new article:
Sea level rise ‘linked to climate change’
SCIENTISTS have rejected claims that the latest research on climate change finds no link between global warming and rising sea levels.
CSIRO scientist Dr John Church, regarded as Australia’s leading authority on sea level and climate change, said they were clearly connected.
“It is clearly linked to increases in greenhouse gases,” he said.
“Sea level has already increased the rate of rise from the 18th and 19th century. The instrumental record would indicate an acceleration during the 20th century and the projections will indicate a further acceleration during the 21st century.”
Similarly, Professor Thomas Stocker, co-chairman of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) working group on the physical science of climate change, said sea level rise had been considered for many decades and the observations of its rise were unequivocal.
Digital Pass $1 for first 28 Days
“The further really essential focus that our assessment will have is what is sea level doing in response to the increased concentration of greenhouse gases,” he said.
And on heatwaves and climate change:
Dr Scott Power, of the Australian Bureau of Meteorology, said extreme temperatures, heatwaves and bushfires were part and parcel of summer in Australia.
But climate change was increasing the likelihood and intensity of such extremities.
“So far in Australia we have seen warming of about 0.9 degrees Celsius since 1910 and…..increases are projected to be much higher than that if emissions aren’t brought down over the coming decades,” he said.
“So these sorts of events will become increasingly more common and the temperature records that are set will tend to go up with each passing decade.”
Dr Power said that didn’t mean there wouldn’t be very cold periods as the climate system wasn’t wholly determined by humans.
“It is clear that these sorts of things do become more common under climate change and it is clear that Australia has warned up, the world has warmed up and coastal seal levels have warmed up, global sea levels have warmed up,” he said.
Unfortunately this Government doesn’t realize that the people are on devices that share information at a blink of an eye, if they want to keep Nz on their side they should go the slash and burn on themselves rather than quietly try and hope it won’t get noticed.
The 5-year mean global temperature has been flat for a decade, which we interpret as a
combination of natural variability and a slowdown in the growth rate of the net climate forcing.
The 5-year mean global temperature has been flat for a decade I’m sure someone here can tell Hansen he’s wrong.
which we interpret as a combination of natural variability – overwhelming the anthropogenic forcing? Say it ain’t so Jim…
and a slowdown in the growth rate of the net climate forcing – this bit takes a bit more deciphering, but since Jim and all claim GHG’s are the dominant forcing, he’s tacitly stating a deceleration in forcing from GHG’s. But our emissions are still rising aren’t they?
50,000 unemployed young Kiwis not in work, training or education. Send them to Chch to help rebuild the city. Why not? RadioLive Drive 3pm
If I was a young Kiwi not in work, training or education and work was available in Christchurch I wouldn’t need to be sent, I’d go and get a job myself.
RightNow, I’m sure you know year on year temperature changes don’t mean anything, and five years is a very short time.
The 2012 temparature was not abnormally high compared to the rest of this decade, but compared to last century it was. What is of far more interest is decade to decade changes.
Last year’s average was 14.5C, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said. That’s a full degree above the 20th century average of 13.9C.
Aurth group out of the University of Alabama at Huntsville looks at temperatures measured by satellites and only goes back to 1979, but is preferred by climate sceptics. That measurement ranked 2012 as the ninth warmest on record and notes that 11 of the 12 hottest years in their dataset have occurred since 2001.
NASA, which measures temperatures differently, ranks 2012 as ninth warmest. It put the temperature at 14.6C.
Some global warming sceptics have claimed the world hasn’t warmed in the last 16 years, but each decade is warmer than the last. Even the first three years of this decade were warmer than the last, the two agencies said.
Since 1963, NOAA said the global temperature has increased at a rate of 0.15C a decade.
There is a fine line between freedom of speech and the promotion of hate speech, more often than not the State is required to intervene and determine what is fair and what is just slander.
Pete, shame nobody would put their name to that piece you quote, just AP (Associated Press). They’re not scientists, have no peer reviewed papers, so by griff’s rules we should just ignore them.
However, for the fun of it:
1) “Last year’s average was 14.5C, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said. That’s a full degree above the 20th century average of 13.9C.” – obvious fail on the maths, even if we allow they meant a full degree F, but why mix scales?
2) Gee, it warmed through the end of last century? Who knew?
3) “Some global warming sceptics have claimed the world hasn’t warmed in the last 16 years, but each decade is warmer than the last.” Hansen said it too. And let’s not forget the analogy of height – in my 20′s my average height was taller than in my teens, that doesn’t mean I’m still growing. This “each decade is warmer than the last” argument must necessarily now be tested again at the end of 2019 for it to be held up as valid. If it is cooler, goodbye to the AGW premise yes? I doubt it, there’ll be new excuses by then.
4) “Since 1963, NOAA said the global temperature has increased at a rate of 0.15C a decade.” – century scale warming of 1.5 deg C, I don’t see the problem. And it’s decelerating!
For the moment. There are (credible) claims it is a fluctuation caused by normal climate cycles – currently cooling tendencies are balancing AGW warming. And when those cycles swing back to warming later this decade the two will add to an acceleration of warming.
I may not need to go to Queensland for the winter in my retirement.
There is a fine line between freedom of speech and the promotion of hate speech, more often than not the State is required to intervene and determine what is fair and what is just slander.
I’d suggest the line is fairly clear – if it crosses over into advocacy that is hate speech. So “Klingons are malevolent, warmongering bastards” is free speech, “Klingons are malevolent, warmongering bastards so let’s go get them before they get us” crosses that line (see, you can learn much from Star Trek, which was a morality play in outer space, mostly).
And it is the courts which are called upon to make the distinction not the State, and so it should ever be. The courts develop a view over time, based on precedent, into which many barristers and judges have had input and about which those accused have had fair right of appeal.
Politicians, however, tend to believe they were destined to rule (not represent) us as some sort of birthright, and that fluking their way to a high list ranking somehow confers omniscience. Most have had little real world experience, have had to conform to a rigid ideology in order to achieve political preference, and are the last people we want determining the limits of our freedoms.
“There are (credible) claims it is a fluctuation caused by normal climate cycles” – I accept that (which BTW is tacitly accepting that natural variation can overwhelm anthropogenic forcing).
In a nutshell the long term trend contradicts the alarmist claims of accelerating warming.
A chef who verbally abused her boss and harassed him at home has been awarded nearly $30,000.
A verbally abusive chef? Is there another kind?
“It is hardly surprisingly that she flew off the handle and behaved as she did. She saw the situation for what it was, a fait accompli.”
Well that’s one way to look at it. Another way to look at it is that she is an adult and is responsible for her own behaviour and that if she is abusive she shouldn’t expect to be consulted further. If the initial presentation was a “ruse” then that should be grounds for unfair dismissal, not merely rely on the fact that consultation stopped because she was abusive. Perhaps there is information not reported, otherwise doesn’t look like a fair decision.
Pity this column is getting like the Standard where two or so male bitches seek to chastise each other more and more bitchy language.
They would appear to have been kicked off the Standard so they come here.
At least its free speech, but does take up a lot of space.
Rex Widerstrom (4,879) Says:
January 17th, 2013 at 2:15 pm
KevinH says:
There is a fine line between freedom of speech and the promotion of hate speech, more often than not the State is required to intervene and determine what is fair and what is just slander.
I’d suggest the line is fairly clear – if it crosses over into advocacy that is hate speech. So “Klingons are malevolent, warmongering bastards” is free speech, “Klingons are malevolent, warmongering bastards so let’s go get them before they get us” crosses that line (see, you can learn much from Star Trek, which was a morality play in outer space, mostly).
I’m not sure I agree the line is clear at all. Political speech inherently “advocates” something. For instance “Klingon’s are malevolent, warmongering bastards, and we should pass a law to annihilate them all”. I still think the fundamental guiding principle is harm to others. But that harm must be demonstrable and direct. There is a world of difference between speaking in a general sense about how Klingon’s should all be killed and speaking in a specific context inciting a crowd to specific and predictable action (for instance yelling on a megaphone to a crowd “over there is a Klingon, get him!”).
The Imminent lawless action test in the United States is a good example of this principle in my view.
“The Court upheld the statute on the ground that, without more, “advocating” violent means to effect political and economic change involves such danger to the security of the State that the State may outlaw it. Cf. Fiske v. Kansas, 274 U.S. 380 (1927). But Whitney has been thoroughly discredited by later decisions. See Dennis v. United States, 341 U.S. 494, at 507 (1951). These later decisions have fashioned the principle that the constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not permit a State to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action”
Your point is a good one… advocating the passing of a law to annihilate Klingons versus fomenting a lynch mob to do so does throw up a more nuanced situation.
Though such a call would only be likely to succeed, I’d suggest, in a state in which respect for freedom was already marginal or most likely non-existent. Hence we can afford to be tolerant of the Westboro Baptist Church because, for all its other faults, the US isn’t likely to legislate to enact any of its extremist agenda whereas groups with a smiliar mien operating in a more oppressive state would potentially hold far more sway.
So I’d still argue that the line is fairly clear in a liberal democracy, which I should originally have added as a qualifier, and that it echoes the old adage about sticks and stones versus words – or more precisely, advocating the hurling of sticks and stones as against hurling words, no matter what those words may be.
There is of course a separate issue of libel and slander but again the line is relatively clear, as per the “reasonable person” test; calling me an ugly troll is unlikely to materially diminish my standing in the eyes of a reasonable person, while falsely claiming I’d defrauded your dear old maiden aunt out of her bingo winnings is at least prima facie slanderous.
I guess the point I was trying to make is that while a minority of situations may require some deeper thought, in most cases it’s as simple as applying Orwells dictum that if liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear, yet we seem to spend a lot of time agonising over exactly that, and often failing by that standard as when we banned David Irving.
RightNow says: ‘Pete, BTW, “The 5-year mean global temperature has been flat for a decade” indicates 15 years of flat.’
Yep that is correct RN. Yet over in Germany, where more and more of the populace are realising that CAGW is a bullshit scam, the climate has been COOLING for 15 years!
Golly gosh gwiff! Arctic sea ice extent today is, for all practical purposes, BACK TO NORMAL! However we won’t see this widely reported in the mainstream media.
axeman, the AGW industry is in its twilight years. Politicians have played along in order to win votes. Not because the voters (or politicians) have a literal belief in AGW, but because it is seen as caring for the environment generally. No politician wants to be seen not caring for the environment in a rich Western country !
However that is all changing. (It would change even faster if people knew what AGW mitigation was really costing them.) Voters are waking up and it will not be long before the money for research and “green jobs” starts to become scarce. I predict we will see “climate scientists” start changing their “consensus view” in sinc with the money drying up. No doubt they will manufacture another looming crisis to stay relevant and keep the money coming in. They have history.
Increasingly we see major carbon emitters refusing to take part in this nonsense.
Only 37 of 194 nations signed the treaty that replaces the Kyoto Protocol, which expires December 31 – and several countries may withdraw their consent. That means the new agreement is legally non-binding and covers only at best 15% of global carbon dioxide emissions.
Has there ever been a more pointless circle fuck on any blog anywhere, ever, than the never ending
pointless puke from either side, day after day, week after week, month after month between the same old
usual suspects clogging up this otherwise sometimes interesting discussion with neverending garbage
about global warming ?
For fucks sake, get over it you fools.
Try and get a life.
Want to take a punt on what will be the next load of bullshit dragged up to scare the stuffing out of the wallets of the gullible & lead us into (socialist) world government?
nasska. Have you noticed that the UN fuckup involving one who should be avoided at all costs is no longer getting any airtime. FFS are they scared of her.
Could be that they still tremble at the memory of the scowl. More likely although that they suck up & keep broadcasting the socialist bullshit regardless…..after all it’s all for “the cause” & they all want to be seen as good little comrades.
Parata is a complete fuck up. Even the most staunch of National party supporters would have to admit that the sooner Key gives her the arse the better. But…..not on Planet Adolf is seems.
The plan is too build a gym in my garage. Probably early April. Squat rack, bench, punching bag. I think i can do it for a couple of grand. no1 fitness seems to have some good stuff. benches that will hold 400kg etc
lucky prick! I’m tripping over the hoardes of new years resolutioners at the gym at the moment… argh
I don’t know how Parata is managing her portfolio overall, but there have been some pretty major and glaring stuffups. How much of that is her direct responsibility I have no idea.
What I do know is that from what I’ve seen of her, in parliament and in media clips what key said about her communication skills…
It will take a massive turnaround this year from Parata to build any degree of confidence even amongst the non-opposition.
“I think there was one or two times last year when, for a variety of different reasons, she wasn’t able to completely articulate exactly what we were doing in a coherent way and that caused some problems. “
…is a major understatement. Words come out but nothing worth listening to is said.
Rex Widerstrom (4,882) Says:
January 17th, 2013 at 5:11 pm
I guess the point I was trying to make is that while a minority of situations may require some deeper thought, in most cases it’s as simple as applying Orwells dictum that if liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear, yet we seem to spend a lot of time agonising over exactly that, and often failing by that standard as when we banned David Irving.
Agreed.
Although no comparison can really be made to the Holocaust, I would have thought that people would not want their attitudes to resemble Nazism in the slightest and unfortunately when you seek to enact legal sanctions or restrictions against others based solely on what they believe you are, however modestly, bringing yourself closer to that kind of fascism. Worse still, by attempting to repress such offensive opinions you cast them in the role of victim which is more likely to rally people to their defense and possibly to their point of view. These people consequently gain publicity and attention they do not deserve. It would be better to ignore them or, if a response must be made, to defeat them in the court of public opinion with superior argument rather than legal sanctions and restrictions. To believe such legal measures are necessary is to entertain the possibility that such an argument might be lost, and if that is the case then we’re fucked anyway.
A man went to WINZ in Auckland having seen an ad for a Gynaecologist’s Assistant. Naturally interested, he asked the lady at the desk for details.
The clerk pulled up the file and read; “The job entails getting the ladies ready for the gynaecologist. ” “You have to help the women out of their underwear, lay them down and carefully wash their private regions, then apply shaving foam and gently shave off their pubic hair, then rub in soothing oils so they’re ready for the gynaecologist’s examination.” “The annual salary is $95,000, and if you’re interested you’ll have to go to Hamilton. ”
” My God, is that where the job is?” asked the man. She answered: “No Sir, that’s where the end of the queue is.”
I’ll tell you what gets right up my nose, and that’s adverts for shit like Circulo on Radiolive. Snakeoil snakeoil snakeoil. What’s that shit meant to do anyway? I’ve looked at the site… can Hawthorn berries steady the beat of the heart? Or have any kind of effect on the heart? Ever feel like something is a total total con and waste of money? Where’s the science backing up all of these claims? If it was that good… wouldn’t your doctor prescribe this stuff? What do doctors say about it?
It’s just a con to catch the gullible. A bit like the micro men who stand impatiently at the letterbox waiting for their penis developer to be delivered.
If we cut out nasskas jokes and all the usual suspects arguing drivel about global warming,
what are we left with ?
Fuck all.
How about offerring a reward for the first correspondent who can introduce an interesting subject.
Failing that, Griff, Kea and Reid etc. rule.
Or, Pete George could entertain by arguing both sides of a non subject. (just for a change) Pete could
discuss with himself how many fairies can dance on the head of a pin.
What would be wrong with waking up and putting a stop to any futher muslim immigrants.
Would it be a great long term investment to pay muslims to F.O.
Declare New Zealand muslim free. Now there is a subject to conjure with.
How about we discus the state of alcoholic ex teachers?
How their disappointing and futile life decays into cirrhosis of the liver a miserable existence where no longer does a class of persecuted 13year old have to kowtow to irrational demands and senseless discipline.
That would be so tragic would it not beryl to have a life so futile and meaningless.
This reminds me of when johnboy went into his bedroom with a sheep under his arm, and said this is the pig I have sex with when you have headache, that’s not a pig it’s a sheep his wife sleepily said.
Johnboy replied…I wasn’t talking to you.
One day i went down the beach with a moron.
A real live guy with a iq around eighty on a sunny day.
So any way me and the moron where watching the waves go in and out.
complete with the ever present waxheads waiting for a big wave.
A big wave comes up and a few of the surfers catch a ride.
The wave surges up the beach and flows right back out and the moron says look at the tide go in and out.
I say no moron that’s not the tide washing in and out that’s just a wave.
I left the moron standing there and as the tide came up a wave washed him away.
Seems if you can not tell the difference between tide and wave you must be a moron.
The sort that would stand there and die because they can not see the tide for the waves.
Then I had a little think about the rising tide of a warming climate and the big surge of heat in 1998.
and the fact that some morons can not tell the difference between a rising tide and a single wave.
BB you have to wonder how many lives Parata has left. She has been a disaster for National and clearly out of her depth with what is a tough portfolio. Educated workforces that are highly unionised like Education and health are tough but Parata needs to spend some time with Tony Ryall and learn how its done, Key may well live to regret his lack of action on Parata.
January 17th, 2013 at 8:17 am
Odd story from granny Herald: German court fines Holocaust-denying bishop.
How can a German court fine a British citizen for remarks made on Swedish TV? Alas granny doesn’t expand
Holocaust denial is up there with the faked moon landings, the US Government bringing down the twin towers and the latest nuttiness that the US Government faked Sandy Hook
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:25 am
@ Andrei agree its nutty, but even given their (the Germans) history, it’s hardly a crime.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:31 am
@Andrei
I imagine it’s an EU thing, unified legal systems or something like that.
I have zero sympathy for the shit head concerned.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:34 am
Lance (1,617) Says:
January 17th, 2013 at 8:31 am
@Andrei
I imagine it’s an EU thing, unified legal systems or something like that.
I have zero sympathy for the shit head concerned.
I agree, free speech would be a horrible thing.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:34 am
Geert Wilders will visit Australia..Sydney , Melbourne , Perth in February.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:38 am
Yes Tinman
Free speech would be a horrible thing. There is no such thing as total freedom, rather freedom with responsibility.
But if you can’t tell shit from clay, I would understand.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:42 am
Would you feel the same way if it were illegal to, say, question the citizenship of the President of the US? Or to challenge the spiritual beliefs of maori? Or to question the “global consensus” of CAGW? The problem with defining “allowable” versus “non allowable” speech is just that.
I’m totally up for people having responisbility for what they do with their freedom, including being treated with contempt and derision by the rest of us, but treating them as criminals?
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:43 am
Wrong again Lance.
Free speech is exactly that, whether you agree with what is said or not.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:45 am
Pete George: Thanks for your reply at 7:27pm yesterday to my earlier question. You’re clearly in favour of disposing of TVNZ.
Your suggestion about retaining an element of public broadcasting makes reasonable sense to me (i.e. NZ on Air funding of public-interest programmes “broadcast” through mixed media, not just traditional TV or radio). However, I would suggest three qualifications:
a) tight legislative definition of “public-interest programmes”;
b) very limited and clearly-defined annual budget allocation; and
c) sunset clause in the empowering legislation (10-12 years?) to facilitate a positive legislative extension or automatic termination at that time.
Re my second qualification, I have in mind a funding formula such as “0.25% of total Government expenditure”. (However that kind of approach could be insulated against political manipulation. )
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:50 am
Oh fuck, here we go…..
So Tinman
Vote:Randomly abusing people, racist taunts, accusations of criminal activity are all O.K.?
That would be free speech wouldn’t it?
January 17th, 2013 at 8:50 am
The guy is nuts but if saying nutty things was a crime just imagine how lucrative a field for the prosecutors kiwiblog GD threads might be………
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:52 am
@KiwiGreg
We already do, it’s called libel.
Are you saying there should be no libel or perjury etc?
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:53 am
Except you don’t go to jail or get fined for questioning the official account of those things. Nor do you go to jail, or get fined, for questioning the official account of all those killed, since the war, under socialist regimes. The Holocaust was terrible, but is not even close to being as bad as what happened in Mao’s China, for example. Stalin killed more people in the Ukraine, in one year, than the entire Holocausts even most inflated figures. Some estimates of Mao’s death toll exceed the TOTAL death toll of the war on ALL sides combined.
So why is it (only) against the law to question the official account of the Holocaust, inflicted on Jews, by the Socialist workers party of Germany?
By the way… most of the people who died in the war, were christians, not Jews.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:54 am
Yes Lance they are.
Words do no actual harm at all, they are simply potential noise.
You may accuse me of anything, if I don’t hear it or of it it does me no harm and I don’t care.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:54 am
@Andrei
Vote:It’s a criminal offence in Germany to deny the holocaust. This man broke the law.
Maybe there should be a campaign to change the law but that’s not what is being said here.
January 17th, 2013 at 8:57 am
@ Lance, of course not, that’s part of what I mean by taking responsibility for your use of free speech. Criminalising it isnt the answer (libel is a civil matter, perjury isn’t about free speech).
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:58 am
1. Yes they are ok.
2. Yes it is free speech.
I am interested who you think should decide what can be said and what can not be said Lance ? Would you be ok with, for example, a ultra right wing government deciding what we can say ?
You assume that our left wing regime will decide and that they will retain power, but that could change, as it is in parts of Europe. You are inviting trouble by opposing free speech. Careful what you ask for.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:59 am
Lance (1) According to the story he didn’t say it in Germany
Vote:(2) as was said above why is Holocaust denial a crime? Why don’t we just treat nuts as um er well nuts
January 17th, 2013 at 8:59 am
@ Kea – because that is German law, they have a unique perspective and no doubt the law was bought in when they were still feeling guilty about everything. It’s also (mostly) against the law to display swastikas and other nazi paraphenalia in Germany for the same reason. I agree with Lance on that point but it is up to the Germans to change their own laws not us, we can simply point and laugh.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:00 am
Nope. It’s pure German law.
The argumentation is something along the lines that Richard Williamson knew and purposefully allowed his comments to spread to Germany and therefore is subject to the German laws.
Agree that it’s a silly law, born out of the German history, but it is obsolete in modern Germany now.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:01 am
Whale has been exercising his free speech but it’s not a good look when he uses his powerful pulpit to randomly abuse. He accuses Labourites of being nasty and Greens of being hypocritical but he’s being both in his latest attempt at ginger bashing. I call boomerang on his claim of beserk.
Told you they’d start fighting back
Whale oil be still fighting back
Random abuse detracts substantially from valid attacks on bull.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:01 am
The interview was conducted near Regensburg, hence it was a “crime” on German soil.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:03 am
@KEA
WTF?
Wow, I think society sets the standards, you think there should be no standards.
Nuff said
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:04 am
There is a kind of flip side to this too – which is state sponsored propaganda of particular viewpoints, and not just form totalitarian states. Visit the Japanese war museum in Tokyo and you will be left with the strong impression that peaceful Japan was forced into fighting a series of defensive wars to protect itself from foreign agressors while falling over itself to protect civilians from harm. There was no rape of Nanking, just Japanese casualties protecting civilians from terrorists. It’s quite extraordinary.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:05 am
Yes Kiwi Dave on re reading the story I find the words were actually uttered on German soil but broadcast in Sweden
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:05 am
Hi Calendar……
A bright January suggestion by you.
My problem with the whole “public-interest” issue is the definition, thereof.
Given the political leanings (decidedly left wing with only a rare centrist) of the producers (the folk who determine the subject matter, and thrust of any programme) I would just as soon do without any form of “public broadcasting”. It is a throwback to the days when possession of a radio was a licenced privilege, and gave rise to the Beeb and NZBS. My UK friends are forever grumbling over their Beeb fee, but they never vote with civil disobedience…..
Incidentally, PBS in the US appears to be decided wobbly due to cuts in corporate sponsorship and likely federal and state grant cuts. Their audience is only a fraction of Fox (which beats all other networks), for example.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:05 am
However there is a huge amount of flexibility to decide whether to prosecute or not. In this case it was rather absurd to prosecute.
Vote:The absurdity is that such a move gives the man and his views a much larger platform and publicity than he would have otherwise had.
January 17th, 2013 at 9:10 am
@eszett
Vote:I agree.
It is a tricky issue dealing with loons when they push the boundaries.
January 17th, 2013 at 9:11 am
KiwiGreg – ” I agree with Lance on that point but it is up to the Germans to change their own laws not us, we can simply point and laugh”
I am pointing and laughing. However, Lance seems to think freedom of speech needs to be restricted to “approved” things that he agrees with. And that I do not agree with.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:11 am
ze Germans feel so bad about WW2 they have become a nation of limp wristed wimps.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:12 am
Would be just more satisfying to do this to loons
Vote:
January 17th, 2013 at 9:14 am
@OneTrack
You are making shit up.
I guess the school holidays are boring for you.
Dick
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:14 am
Lance, I am happy for “society” to set the standards, but not central government. Under no circumstances is it ok for people to punished by the state for speaking their minds, regardless of how twisted those minds may be.
What you are really demanding is that YOUR way of thinking is enforced by the state.
How about a “law” making it an offence to say there was a holocaust ? Are you ok with that, and if not, why ? There are people who would actually support that. What happens if they get into power, once we have previously established that free speech can be a criminal offence ?
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:14 am
Well, for limp wristed wimp they are still pretty good at something
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_arms_exports
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:20 am
Lance, So you are now advocating violent assault against those you don’t agree with ?
Never takes long for you lefties to show your true colours. So far you have demanded the state imprison and fine people who say things YOU don’t like. Now we have you supporting casual violence and beatings to prevent freedom of speech.
As a liberal I struggle with the mentality of people like you. Why not let people decide for themselves what to take notice of ?
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:20 am
@Kea
It is not acceptable for bullies to yell racial abuse and intimidate the weak and law abiding. Society sets that standard.
Removing that safeguard would suck. Bullies, thugs and gangs would love it.
We seem to disagree on this point. You seem to be promoting a very ugly society IMHO.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:21 am
@KEA
WTF?
I am a lefty because I disagree with you?
Hopeless
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:26 am
Oh fuck KEA
You twist my words more than any leftie I have every seen.
I promoted the existing law, think it’s not that bad. I ask you to point out where I have promoted MY views over the law?
I had a bit of a laugh with with Buzz Aldrins solution… you of course are a humorless lemon sucker. Got that, Note: KEA can’t take a joke.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:26 am
Lance, if society really set the standard, then how could that safeguard be removed ? If society feels that way, then why do you advocate the state making laws about it ?
German “society” DID NOT demand people who question the holocaust be thrown in jail. That was the state. German people did not demand Jews be killed, that was the state. Every large scale human rights abuse has been done by the state. Do not look to them for your morals, get your own moral compass in order.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:29 am
KEA
So the society doesn’t vote for a government to promote their wishes? They are completely disconnected?
You logic is becoming more fucked by the sentence.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:30 am
Lance, I see the humour in that clip, I was making a point.
However having the state restrict freedom of speech, in anyway at all, is far from funny. You must have a dismal view of your fellow man, to think we all need politicians to provide us with morals.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:31 am
Don’t be such a delicate petal Pete George. A bit of rough and tumble is good for the soul – we don’t all want to sit around drinking tea with cucumber sandwhiches discussing the issues in earnest fashion the way you do.
If you don’t like Whaleoils style don’t go there
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:32 am
@Kea
Vote:You have a closed mind.
January 17th, 2013 at 9:33 am
Lance, thanks for the “offensive language” (again) I suggest a beating and imprisonment to enforce “societies” standards. See, you convinced me. Well done !
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:35 am
And I thank you Kea for the journey into twisting words, ignoring replies and making shit up.
You aren’t a journalist are you?
Vote:You are good at this shit.
January 17th, 2013 at 9:44 am
I couldn’t care less what I am at any given time, Left, right center or on the fence pending the situation and i think most people are like this.
The young are coming and with them comes great change.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:45 am
Andrei: “Don’t be such a delicate petal Pete George.”
That’s funny coming from you. You’re not exactly Mr Tolerant when it comes to comment on some topics.
Do you like DPF’s style on all everything he posts about? If not why do you come here?
“A bit of rough and tumble is good for the soul” (except when you take exception to it).
Supporting minority bullying and repeated nastiness doesn’t seem very Christian-like.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:47 am
“The young are coming and with them comes great change.”
Really? The young have always been coming as it’s kind of hard to skip that part of growing up and there are actually proportionally a lot less young then in previous generations.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:48 am
Lance, I think I did answer all the points raised. However you have not really addressed mine.
Do you often write to your MP for guidance on issues such as; morality, child rearing, how much you should drink ?
It may surprise you to learn that many of us do not look to politicians for moral guidance or instruction on how to manage our lives or treat others decently. I think that is the difference between us. I do not need the threat of being punished by the state to force me to treat others properly. I assume that most others are the same, even though I have far more exposure to those who do not share those values, than most people.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:49 am
Lance,
I think what you are ignoring is that any restriction of speech should only be on the basis of identifiable harm to another individual. Abusing people in public, harassment, defamation, underage pornography, inciting a crowd to riot/harm another person… all these things while a form of “speech” harm other people directly and are justified limitations.
However, the mere having an opinion which is disagreeable (i.e. holocaust denial) is not harmful and one cannot reasonably use the notion that such speech might (in some indirect and unquantifiable way) encourage people towards harmful political ends because by that standard no speech is free. So the fact you support this law does indicate that you are not a supporter of free expression in my view.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:49 am
Azeraph raises an interesting point. Is the obsession with political pigeonholing more prevalent with older people or do young people try to do it as much?
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:51 am
Without realizing it the last century killed the moral compass system of nations, the Church system. So, what is there now? What is there to replace it? Neo-Atheist 2.0? philosophy??
Statistically speaking crime is dropping planetwide or is it? or is it the shock of how fast the news of it reaches us in this era of today?
There’s a Q here that i haven’t seen ever addressed anywhere but even i’m finding it hard to grasp it as it feels it’s on the tip of my tongue.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:56 am
Pete George
Whale and his dislike of redheads is a reflection of his bulling nature and his mental issues around being a fat bastard
We can not change our genetic hair color his persecution of gingers is wank. We can stop being fatty pigs. I am sure he would not respond well to constant posts pointing this out.
Whales “http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2013/01/i-hate-it-when-people-use-depression-as-an-excuse-for-being-a-cnt/
I hate it when difference in hair color gives someone motivation to be a c*nt . You are stepping past joking and actively persecuting those that have no chance to conforming to your idea of norm.
dime take note I am not being disrespectful to the over built just to whales attitude.
Ps Whales post on subsidized insurance cracks me up. does he realize that the insurance costs are high and rising due to AGW As reinforced by this year being second most costly for natural disasters in the USA.?
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:56 am
Azeraph, our morality may be partly informed by religious belief, however much of it is in spite of what is written in the bible. We do not kill people for working on a Sunday, or require rape victims to marry their attackers. It is not fashionable to stone non-virgin brides to death on their fathers door step.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 10:00 am
Everybody one way or another is a minority Pete George because we are unique.
It is only moronic lefties who put people into boxes to create so called “victim groups” so they can “bully” people into complying with whatever nutty scheme they have in mind or transfer wealth or bestow some sort favour upon someone who would not otherwise merit it.
The world is a tough place, I leaned this as a child, we have to cope with it. People make fun of your hair, your cloths, your accent, your origin and ethnicity. ususaly this is good natured and if they go too far a good bop on the nose is a good signal to them that they have
Whaleoil has called me a c***t more than once Pete George and I don’t go boo hoo hooing to nanny about it.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 10:01 am
I will never understand people whose justification for something is “it’s the law”. I think laws require moral justification and if one is unable to justify it then it is logical to oppose the law and to criticize anyone punished under such a law. People whose argument devolves to “it’s the law” either have no argument, or are statists keen to submit to authority merely because they are an authority.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 10:01 am
Kea (1,684) Says:
January 17th, 2013 at 9:56 am
Exactly Kea, when was the last time you knew anyone who was personally? or in the news? I’m not trying to convert you or anyone but the older gens have this fixation.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 10:05 am
@Weihana
You have come the closest to what I am saying.
First paragraph, agree totally
I am not, nor ever did promote that holocaust denial should be made illegal in this country, or other such nutter views.
All I said was I had no sympathy for the offender. I personally find those views offensive. I assume I am allowed have those views?
Somehow this got twisted by the logically challenged into me advocating draconian state control, any attempts at explanation then was twisted further.
I think you will find Germany had major problems with the attempted resurrection of the Nazi party post WW2 and holocaust denial was a vehicle to further vilify a racial minority, elements of German society really wanting the ugly truth to go away. This had potential for harm and why it was a law it that country. One might say a unique case.
As I further said maybe it is time for Germany to move on.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 10:07 am
Weihana “its the law” and “I was just obeying orders” have a certain sort of synchronicity wouldn’t you say.
Not to forget those who broke some Nazi era laws during those times have now taken on an heroic aura
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 10:08 am
Wiki
No mention of the church in that definition maybe the church has no prior clam to being the holder of morality
Vote:Distilled ethics is
do to others as they do to you /do to others as you would have them do to you.
Christianity has a long and comprehensive history of ignoring this. Shall we stop Catholics from marring. Or enforce what they can do with there bodies Make them take birth control Or even persecute them as they have done to other sects for eons.
January 17th, 2013 at 10:13 am
@Weihana
Your comment at 10:01am made a statement that I had no logic behind my statement other than “it was the law”
This is a big assumption, and incorrect.
Now Andrei is degenerating this into war crimes justification….. Fuck
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 10:23 am
Tell that to Peter Ellis.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 10:25 am
In the written history of man which is what? 6ooo years where do we see a state that doesn’t have a separate system that takes on the role of a moral compass for the group/s of that state?
In today’s era which may seem similar to last centuries system we have something that has never been seen before.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 10:26 am
No I’m not, I am just pointing out that not all laws made by man are morally good.
And there may be compelling reasons for disobeying the laws of the land at times.
Thus in Nazi occupied Europe it was a crime punishable by death to harbour Jews, THE LAW, and some of those who broke the law paid for it with their lives.
My guess is that most people who read this thread think those who broke that particular law behaved in a manner most exemplary
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 10:38 am
Andrei, not sure what you’re on about, Whale didn’t call me anything and I didn’t boo hoo to anyone.
It’s not people with ginger hair (or many other miniroties) who put themselves in boxes, it’s the bullies and the encouragers of bullies that do that.
Those doing the bullying claim they are good natured and funny, but those on the receiving end often don’t see it that way.
So you propose violence as a way of resolving problems? Isn’t violence an insidious part of an immoral society?
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 10:40 am
Andrei:
Are laws against violence morally good?
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 10:42 am
“dime take note I am not being disrespectful to the over built just to whales attitude.” lmao what the fuck?
how did i come into this?
it does make me laugh that whale is constantly bagging fatties. the dude rolls with multiple chins.
for what its worth i started reading whale for a while. the negativity got to me. reading whale is like watching sean hannity. they are always right. you cant disagree with them. always trashy name calling etc.
Dime prefers a classy DPF style blogger. Sure, some of us dirtbags lower the tone in the comments section but DPF is above all the shitty name calling etc
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 10:51 am
Mr Dime it was a way to point out that I dont dislike fat bastards just those that are so and persecute others.
Vote:You bite so it was properly a justified arse cover.
January 17th, 2013 at 11:02 am
Dime is pretty good nick at the moment
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 11:06 am
You commitment to building a impressive body still going strong dime?
Vote:Have not seen a resent up date on you outcomes
your posts inspired many to consider their own fitness and commitment to doing something about it.
January 17th, 2013 at 11:15 am
Ive just been using kettlebells over the summer.
Diet is pretty dam clean. Easy in summer. lots of protein and salads. just got back into juicing over the last week too. vege juice etc
The plan is too build a gym in my garage. Probably early April. Squat rack, bench, punching bag. I think i can do it for a couple of grand. no1 fitness seems to have some good stuff. benches that will hold 400kg etc
Plates are expensive. 20kg plate is about 70 bucks. i need 200kg arghhh
oh yeah, im doing more cardio. im dating this sweet little 23 year old who wants to enter me into round the bays etc cause shes doing it haha managed to avoid all offers so far but i suspect i wont be able to hold out for long
dime wasnt born to run long distances. im a fast twitch muscle guy.. not the weak, slow twitch type 
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 11:22 am
The holocaust denial laws made sense in Europe for a limited period of time after the war just like the occupation of Germany made sense for a time. I would say that time period was about 20 years but those sorts of restrictions are no longer is appropriate in a modern democracy.
Vote:It just gives radical Islamists ammo to argue in favour of blasphemy laws by saying ‘but free speech is not absolute’.
January 17th, 2013 at 11:24 am
Lance,
Sure. It doesn’t exactly bring a tear to my eye either. Though I do find it objectionable that he is punished.
I tend to agree. While not supporting the law per se, I think I can acknowledge that WW2 was such an extreme case that such a law is understandable even if objectionable on principle. However, I certainly feel it has no justification 60-70 years later and aside from being objectionable on principle, it also creates martyrs out of idiots who believe such crap.
Fair enough, the plot of this discussion was a little hard to follow and if I’ve misrepresented your position I apologize. To be honest I just wanted to make the point that I’m not a fan of people saying “it’s the law” as a rebuttal when the discussion really centers around whether the law is justifiable.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 11:34 am
The kerfuffle over BMI cracks up Griff he has always exceeded the range for weight height even thought he is a skinny bastard.
cadio is good no sense on packing extra muscle if you cant move it around for long.
fitness gear is cheap secondhand many splash out on fancy equipment then lose interest
ive always found that exercise based around moving your own body mass is cheap effective and can be done anywhere/time.
still I am to lazy now
Vote:Once it was two 5km bike sprints daily weights every second day and swimming in the weekend.
Now its just work lugging building supplies and mulch that keeps my hart going.
landscaping lugging shit from one place to another.
still the only smoker in the family and my fitness blows the rest away.
January 17th, 2013 at 11:44 am
I generally dont do a lot of isolation exercises. i prefer big, powerful movements.
eg training my back with heavy ass weights does biceps at the same time.
squats, deadlifts, rows, bench press, push press. its all good
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 11:44 am
@Weihana
Thank you, your last reply was a breath of fresh air
Agreed the discussion got way out of hand, deliberately or otherwise.
I was frustrated at being misrepresented so was being blunt. The “it’s the law” line was a particular button for me as I don’t like that justification myself. It appears 2 issues became 1 and the rest was downhill.
1. I don’t like the guys views
2. He stirred the hornets nest and got stung. The right or wrong of the law was worth discussing especially as it was created as a special case but now time has elapsed.
That’s it really
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 11:55 am
“training my back with heavy ass weights does biceps at the same time.
squats, deadlifts, rows, bench press, push press. its all good”
I really didn’t need to hear about your sex life this early in the day dime
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 11:56 am
This morning I was reminded of the Bill English housing allowance scandal.
While English was preaching to New Zealanders about financial belt-tightening, he was ripping off taxpayers:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/2711246/Bill-English-defends-taxpayer-cash-for-house
Does anyone really believe Bill English and his family don’t live in Wellington?
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 12:09 pm
The Australian newspaper reported on Tuesday that “…the latest science on sea levels found no link to global warming or the increased rate of glacier melting”.
This has aparently been corrected:
And in a new article:
And on heatwaves and climate change:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/breaking-news/sea-level-rise-linked-to-climate-change/story-fn3dxiwe-1226554134881
And that will probably warm up the debate.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 12:10 pm
lolyoull know im talking about my sex life when you read the words “cost me” and “cigarette burns”
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 12:24 pm
Unfortunately this Government doesn’t realize that the people are on devices that share information at a blink of an eye, if they want to keep Nz on their side they should go the slash and burn on themselves rather than quietly try and hope it won’t get noticed.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 12:26 pm
http://www.cartoonistgroup.com/store/add.php?iid=79932
cat joke from rational wiki
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 1:06 pm
Pete: sure, why not warm up the debate:
“Global Temperature Update Through 2012″
15 January 2013
J. Hansen, M. Sato, R. Ruedy
http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2013/20130115_Temperature2012.pdf
Yes, that is from a paper by James Hansen.
The 5-year mean global temperature has been flat for a decade I’m sure someone here can tell Hansen he’s wrong.
which we interpret as a combination of natural variability – overwhelming the anthropogenic forcing? Say it ain’t so Jim…
and a slowdown in the growth rate of the net climate forcing – this bit takes a bit more deciphering, but since Jim and all claim GHG’s are the dominant forcing, he’s tacitly stating a deceleration in forcing from GHG’s. But our emissions are still rising aren’t they?
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 1:17 pm
Duncan Garner thinks young people should be sent to Christchurch.
If I was a young Kiwi not in work, training or education and work was available in Christchurch I wouldn’t need to be sent, I’d go and get a job myself.
Is this just a generational thing?
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 1:35 pm
“Duncan Garner thinks young people should be sent to Christchurch.”
If you scratch hard enough most left wingers are fascists at heart.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 1:37 pm
RightNow, I’m sure you know year on year temperature changes don’t mean anything, and five years is a very short time.
The 2012 temparature was not abnormally high compared to the rest of this decade, but compared to last century it was. What is of far more interest is decade to decade changes.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/world-was-warm-but-not-a-record/story-e6frg8y6-1226554946757
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 1:38 pm
David Irving ignited a debate on holocaust denial and freedom of speech. He was denied entry into New Zealand for a speaking engagement and was eventually jailed for his views:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/feb/20/austria.thefarright
There is a fine line between freedom of speech and the promotion of hate speech, more often than not the State is required to intervene and determine what is fair and what is just slander.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 1:52 pm
Pete, shame nobody would put their name to that piece you quote, just AP (Associated Press). They’re not scientists, have no peer reviewed papers, so by griff’s rules we should just ignore them.
However, for the fun of it:
Vote:1) “Last year’s average was 14.5C, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said. That’s a full degree above the 20th century average of 13.9C.” – obvious fail on the maths, even if we allow they meant a full degree F, but why mix scales?
2) Gee, it warmed through the end of last century? Who knew?
3) “Some global warming sceptics have claimed the world hasn’t warmed in the last 16 years, but each decade is warmer than the last.” Hansen said it too. And let’s not forget the analogy of height – in my 20′s my average height was taller than in my teens, that doesn’t mean I’m still growing. This “each decade is warmer than the last” argument must necessarily now be tested again at the end of 2019 for it to be held up as valid. If it is cooler, goodbye to the AGW premise yes? I doubt it, there’ll be new excuses by then.
4) “Since 1963, NOAA said the global temperature has increased at a rate of 0.15C a decade.” – century scale warming of 1.5 deg C, I don’t see the problem. And it’s decelerating!
January 17th, 2013 at 1:54 pm
Pete, BTW, “The 5-year mean global temperature has been flat for a decade” indicates 15 years of flat.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 2:08 pm
For the moment. There are (credible) claims it is a fluctuation caused by normal climate cycles – currently cooling tendencies are balancing AGW warming. And when those cycles swing back to warming later this decade the two will add to an acceleration of warming.
I may not need to go to Queensland for the winter in my retirement.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 2:15 pm
KevinH says:
I’d suggest the line is fairly clear – if it crosses over into advocacy that is hate speech. So “Klingons are malevolent, warmongering bastards” is free speech, “Klingons are malevolent, warmongering bastards so let’s go get them before they get us” crosses that line (see, you can learn much from Star Trek, which was a morality play in outer space, mostly).
And it is the courts which are called upon to make the distinction not the State, and so it should ever be. The courts develop a view over time, based on precedent, into which many barristers and judges have had input and about which those accused have had fair right of appeal.
Politicians, however, tend to believe they were destined to rule (not represent) us as some sort of birthright, and that fluking their way to a high list ranking somehow confers omniscience. Most have had little real world experience, have had to conform to a rigid ideology in order to achieve political preference, and are the last people we want determining the limits of our freedoms.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 2:21 pm
“There are (credible) claims it is a fluctuation caused by normal climate cycles” – I accept that (which BTW is tacitly accepting that natural variation can overwhelm anthropogenic forcing).
In a nutshell the long term trend contradicts the alarmist claims of accelerating warming.
It’s shown very well here: http://www.skepticalscience.com/pics/RealistFrame.gif
See the trend? Linear, < 2 deg C per century. From the blog of the happy clapper that every alarmist loves to quote.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 2:26 pm
Anyway we can relax, it’s 10 here today, that’s way below average. Anthropogenic forcing is well and truly overwhelmed by a wuthering southerly.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 2:50 pm
A verbally abusive chef? Is there another kind?
Well that’s one way to look at it. Another way to look at it is that she is an adult and is responsible for her own behaviour and that if she is abusive she shouldn’t expect to be consulted further. If the initial presentation was a “ruse” then that should be grounds for unfair dismissal, not merely rely on the fact that consultation stopped because she was abusive. Perhaps there is information not reported, otherwise doesn’t look like a fair decision.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 2:55 pm
Pity this column is getting like the Standard where two or so male bitches seek to chastise each other more and more bitchy language.
Vote:They would appear to have been kicked off the Standard so they come here.
At least its free speech, but does take up a lot of space.
January 17th, 2013 at 3:12 pm
I’m not sure I agree the line is clear at all. Political speech inherently “advocates” something. For instance “Klingon’s are malevolent, warmongering bastards, and we should pass a law to annihilate them all”. I still think the fundamental guiding principle is harm to others. But that harm must be demonstrable and direct. There is a world of difference between speaking in a general sense about how Klingon’s should all be killed and speaking in a specific context inciting a crowd to specific and predictable action (for instance yelling on a megaphone to a crowd “over there is a Klingon, get him!”).
The Imminent lawless action test in the United States is a good example of this principle in my view.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imminent_lawless_action
“The Court upheld the statute on the ground that, without more, “advocating” violent means to effect political and economic change involves such danger to the security of the State that the State may outlaw it. Cf. Fiske v. Kansas, 274 U.S. 380 (1927). But Whitney has been thoroughly discredited by later decisions. See Dennis v. United States, 341 U.S. 494, at 507 (1951). These later decisions have fashioned the principle that the constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not permit a State to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action”
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 4:38 pm
Much bigger than Peter Jackson – Life of Pie (pie and circumference are related).
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 5:11 pm
@Weihana
Your point is a good one… advocating the passing of a law to annihilate Klingons versus fomenting a lynch mob to do so does throw up a more nuanced situation.
Though such a call would only be likely to succeed, I’d suggest, in a state in which respect for freedom was already marginal or most likely non-existent. Hence we can afford to be tolerant of the Westboro Baptist Church because, for all its other faults, the US isn’t likely to legislate to enact any of its extremist agenda whereas groups with a smiliar mien operating in a more oppressive state would potentially hold far more sway.
So I’d still argue that the line is fairly clear in a liberal democracy, which I should originally have added as a qualifier, and that it echoes the old adage about sticks and stones versus words – or more precisely, advocating the hurling of sticks and stones as against hurling words, no matter what those words may be.
There is of course a separate issue of libel and slander but again the line is relatively clear, as per the “reasonable person” test; calling me an ugly troll is unlikely to materially diminish my standing in the eyes of a reasonable person, while falsely claiming I’d defrauded your dear old maiden aunt out of her bingo winnings is at least prima facie slanderous.
I guess the point I was trying to make is that while a minority of situations may require some deeper thought, in most cases it’s as simple as applying Orwells dictum that if liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear, yet we seem to spend a lot of time agonising over exactly that, and often failing by that standard as when we banned David Irving.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 5:28 pm
RightNow says: ‘Pete, BTW, “The 5-year mean global temperature has been flat for a decade” indicates 15 years of flat.’
Yep that is correct RN. Yet over in Germany, where more and more of the populace are realising that CAGW is a bullshit scam, the climate has been COOLING for 15 years!
http://notrickszone.com/2013/01/16/european-climate-institute-climate-in-germanys-has-been-cooling-for-15-years/
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 5:46 pm
Golly gosh gwiff! Arctic sea ice extent today is, for all practical purposes, BACK TO NORMAL! However we won’t see this widely reported in the mainstream media.
http://notrickszone.com/2013/01/16/arctic-sea-ice-area-back-to-normal-dramatic-record-refreeze-wipes-out-dramatic-melt-of-august/
And Global ice area is now back to the 1979-2008 mean. Look in the lower right corner here:
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/global.daily.ice.area.withtrend.jpg
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 6:05 pm
regarding “The Huddle” radio Zb @ 5.47
“Gun control in USA”
Why would you have two Obama sycophants on together to have a mutual love fest for Barry Obama ?
What is the point of that ?
When they combine with a Obama loving host its almost sickening.
Many in New Zealand may hang on every word from a failed radio host, a failed politician, a failed brothel madam, a loser
such as P. Corkery but.
How sad is that ?
Talk about scraping the bottom of the barrel.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 6:22 pm
Pete George, thanks for the “life of Pie” link, it made my day
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 6:33 pm
axeman, the AGW industry is in its twilight years. Politicians have played along in order to win votes. Not because the voters (or politicians) have a literal belief in AGW, but because it is seen as caring for the environment generally. No politician wants to be seen not caring for the environment in a rich Western country !
However that is all changing. (It would change even faster if people knew what AGW mitigation was really costing them.) Voters are waking up and it will not be long before the money for research and “green jobs” starts to become scarce. I predict we will see “climate scientists” start changing their “consensus view” in sinc with the money drying up. No doubt they will manufacture another looming crisis to stay relevant and keep the money coming in. They have history.
Increasingly we see major carbon emitters refusing to take part in this nonsense.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 6:41 pm
bereal. 6.05pm
Our Pam loves the sound of her voice and has an opinion on everything. Usually crap. Common as pigs in muck.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 6:44 pm
Has there ever been a more pointless circle fuck on any blog anywhere, ever, than the never ending
pointless puke from either side, day after day, week after week, month after month between the same old
usual suspects clogging up this otherwise sometimes interesting discussion with neverending garbage
about global warming ?
For fucks sake, get over it you fools.
Vote:Try and get a life.
January 17th, 2013 at 6:47 pm
Kea
Want to take a punt on what will be the next load of bullshit dragged up to scare the stuffing out of the wallets of the gullible & lead us into (socialist) world government?
The scum who run the UN will never give up.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 7:00 pm
nasska. Have you noticed that the UN fuckup involving one who should be avoided at all costs is no longer getting any airtime. FFS are they scared of her.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 7:04 pm
RF
Could be that they still tremble at the memory of the scowl. More likely although that they suck up & keep broadcasting the socialist bullshit regardless…..after all it’s all for “the cause” & they all want to be seen as good little comrades.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 7:06 pm
Lol
I know that Adolf is Neville Key’s number one cheer leader but this is hilarious.
http://nominister.blogspot.co.nz/2013/01/how-refreshing.html
Parata is a complete fuck up. Even the most staunch of National party supporters would have to admit that the sooner Key gives her the arse the better. But…..not on Planet Adolf is seems.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 7:06 pm
lucky prick! I’m tripping over the hoardes of new years resolutioners at the gym at the moment… argh
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 7:09 pm
Adolf’s adoration of Neville Key is unbound and limitless.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 7:13 pm
nassaka, I am too scared to say, bereal will scold me
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 7:13 pm
I don’t know how Parata is managing her portfolio overall, but there have been some pretty major and glaring stuffups. How much of that is her direct responsibility I have no idea.
What I do know is that from what I’ve seen of her, in parliament and in media clips what key said about her communication skills…
It will take a massive turnaround this year from Parata to build any degree of confidence even amongst the non-opposition.
…is a major understatement. Words come out but nothing worth listening to is said.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 7:30 pm
Rex Widerstrom (4,882) Says:
January 17th, 2013 at 5:11 pm
Agreed.
Although no comparison can really be made to the Holocaust, I would have thought that people would not want their attitudes to resemble Nazism in the slightest and unfortunately when you seek to enact legal sanctions or restrictions against others based solely on what they believe you are, however modestly, bringing yourself closer to that kind of fascism. Worse still, by attempting to repress such offensive opinions you cast them in the role of victim which is more likely to rally people to their defense and possibly to their point of view. These people consequently gain publicity and attention they do not deserve. It would be better to ignore them or, if a response must be made, to defeat them in the court of public opinion with superior argument rather than legal sanctions and restrictions. To believe such legal measures are necessary is to entertain the possibility that such an argument might be lost, and if that is the case then we’re fucked anyway.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:00 pm
A man went to WINZ in Auckland having seen an ad for a Gynaecologist’s Assistant. Naturally interested, he asked the lady at the desk for details.
The clerk pulled up the file and read; “The job entails getting the ladies ready for the gynaecologist. ” “You have to help the women out of their underwear, lay them down and carefully wash their private regions, then apply shaving foam and gently shave off their pubic hair, then rub in soothing oils so they’re ready for the gynaecologist’s examination.” “The annual salary is $95,000, and if you’re interested you’ll have to go to Hamilton. ”
” My God, is that where the job is?” asked the man. She answered: “No Sir, that’s where the end of the queue is.”
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:05 pm
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:24 pm
The Poms think the horse DNA in the burgers is bad?
Wait till they try and explain the farmer DNA in the Welsh lamb roasts.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:27 pm
That should have been saved for when Johnboy is in attendance
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:31 pm
I’m a patriot. I’ve never fucked a Welsh/Irish sheep in my life!
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:32 pm
His ears must have been burning
Vote:Johnboy, how are ewe?
January 17th, 2013 at 8:32 pm
Fuck! You’re quicker than me Rodders!!!
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:33 pm
Good to see you back JB. There was concern that you’d died & gone to the big ewe paddock Upstairs.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:35 pm
Rodders
I’ve got to put in a good word for Johnboy here. Lately he’s picked up an ill deserved reputation for running around indiscriminately shagging sheep.
In fact, to set the record straight, he’s been with the same sheep for thirteen years & never strayed!
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:35 pm
I get a bit jaded with the scene here from time to time nasska.
Not your good self and folks like you of course you understand!
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:36 pm
It was 42 years as of yesterday old chap!!!!!!
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:39 pm
Good lambing percentage JB?
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:43 pm
I always forgo quantity for quality nasska. Two lovely blondes and never a black lamb in the flock!
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:46 pm
Johnboy – might this brings back happy memories?
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:50 pm
She was a spirited woman my first wife!
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:51 pm
Greek?
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:52 pm
Any way was fine with her…. and anybody now I think of it!
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 8:56 pm
Evening….
I’ll tell you what gets right up my nose, and that’s adverts for shit like Circulo on Radiolive. Snakeoil snakeoil snakeoil. What’s that shit meant to do anyway? I’ve looked at the site… can Hawthorn berries steady the beat of the heart? Or have any kind of effect on the heart? Ever feel like something is a total total con and waste of money? Where’s the science backing up all of these claims? If it was that good… wouldn’t your doctor prescribe this stuff? What do doctors say about it?
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:03 pm
LRC
It’s just a con to catch the gullible. A bit like the micro men who stand impatiently at the letterbox waiting for their penis developer to be delivered.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:48 pm
If we cut out nasskas jokes and all the usual suspects arguing drivel about global warming,
what are we left with ?
Fuck all.
How about offerring a reward for the first correspondent who can introduce an interesting subject.
Failing that, Griff, Kea and Reid etc. rule.
Or, Pete George could entertain by arguing both sides of a non subject. (just for a change) Pete could
discuss with himself how many fairies can dance on the head of a pin.
What would be wrong with waking up and putting a stop to any futher muslim immigrants.
Would it be a great long term investment to pay muslims to F.O.
Declare New Zealand muslim free. Now there is a subject to conjure with.
i’d donate to that.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 9:59 pm
How about we discus the state of alcoholic ex teachers?
How their disappointing and futile life decays into cirrhosis of the liver a miserable existence where no longer does a class of persecuted 13year old have to kowtow to irrational demands and senseless discipline.
That would be so tragic would it not beryl to have a life so futile and meaningless.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 10:07 pm
Well done Griff.
At least thats a step up from your usual one dimensional rants on global warming.
Punctuation would help make your point clearer but Rome was not built in a day.
A word to the wise Griff. English comprehension and expression are linked.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 10:08 pm
How’s it going bereal?
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 10:12 pm
Go in good
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 10:14 pm
bereal could you please point to the less offensive passage.
“What would be wrong with waking up and putting a stop to any futher muslim immigrants.
Would it be a great long term investment to pay muslims to F.O.
Declare New Zealand muslim free. Now there is a subject to conjure with.”
…and…
What would be wrong with waking up and putting a stop to any futher jew immigrants.
Would it be a great long term investment to pay jews to F.O.
Declare New Zealand jew free. Now there is a subject to conjure with.
Vote:January 17th, 2013 at 10:20 pm
This reminds me of when johnboy went into his bedroom with a sheep under his arm, and said this is the pig I have sex with when you have headache, that’s not a pig it’s a sheep his wife sleepily said.
Vote:Johnboy replied…I wasn’t talking to you.
January 17th, 2013 at 10:22 pm
One day i went down the beach with a moron.
A real live guy with a iq around eighty on a sunny day.
So any way me and the moron where watching the waves go in and out.
complete with the ever present waxheads waiting for a big wave.
A big wave comes up and a few of the surfers catch a ride.
The wave surges up the beach and flows right back out and the moron says look at the tide go in and out.
I say no moron that’s not the tide washing in and out that’s just a wave.
I left the moron standing there and as the tide came up a wave washed him away.
Seems if you can not tell the difference between tide and wave you must be a moron.
The sort that would stand there and die because they can not see the tide for the waves.
Then I had a little think about the rising tide of a warming climate and the big surge of heat in 1998.
Vote:and the fact that some morons can not tell the difference between a rising tide and a single wave.
January 17th, 2013 at 10:30 pm
Yoza, well done !
Vote:January 18th, 2013 at 1:26 am
Taylor Swift has done what?
Vote:January 18th, 2013 at 6:01 am
BB you have to wonder how many lives Parata has left. She has been a disaster for National and clearly out of her depth with what is a tough portfolio. Educated workforces that are highly unionised like Education and health are tough but Parata needs to spend some time with Tony Ryall and learn how its done, Key may well live to regret his lack of action on Parata.
Vote:January 18th, 2013 at 6:42 am
Modesty is in his DNA: http://news.yahoo.com/obama-names-8-citizens-highlight-successes-040100625–politics.html
Vote: